The letter was from US but Cameron is in UK. They would have to hire a local attorney to sue him there and follow their laws. I don't recall if the attorney was from UK. Was he?
-
Welcome to ASR. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
dCS threatens with a 7-figure lawsuit over a review
- Thread starter shuppatsu
- Start date
- Status
Cooperation with Ferrum happened 2-3 years later, so....May well be.
There are some comments in the dCS community's own thread on the Bartok review:
Negative Bartok review that I simply can't understand
Seriously, I can’t even begin to grasp what he’s saying, as without a word clock the Bartok is actually a little bright and harsh on initial attack, certainly not laid back or “too smooth.” dCS Bartok Review - Smooth, too smoothdcs.community
A member there using the name wusplay posted:
This would indicate that dCS may not just sue over the review but include subsequent (and maybe less well supported) comments from a person who is involved with a key rival company.
This is worth noting. I wouldn't want to see @amirm or ASR involved in what turns out not to be a dispute purely over an independent review but also over subsequent behaviour that may be less defensible.
There are also lessons for independent reviewers here - one being to stay independent and visibly so, and another being to treat everyone fairly. The argument being presented that Cameron favoured a rival could, if it sticks, be applied to other behaviour that we may believe ethical. Here, products sent by companies for review are treated in a different way to those sent in by members: could that be enough to justify a lawsuit by a manufacturer who receives a poor review?
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2021
- Messages
- 218
- Likes
- 586
dCS is a company, it has no soul, feelings or humanity. However, there are people working there, who make decisions and use resources to do either good or bad things as judged by the observer's morality. I feel for the marketing guy, he clearly states he "loves" the company he works for and that he will not stand by as something he loves is being attacked. It really sounds like he needs a hug or a gentle touch on the hand. Perhaps he is very lonely?
Because of my limited knowledge of anglo-saxon legal systems I will not comment on the legality of dCSs claims with any authority, but having had brushes with similarly litigious companies and individuals in the past (mostly American - not a jab, just an observation), I suspect this is meant to scare Cameron and I would not be surprised such methods have worked in the past for dCS. We, as consumers and as freedom loving -insert your nationality here-, need to fight such scare-tactics. This behaviour is unacceptable, what ever you think of the person being attacked.
With "who" is being attacked in mind, I really am impressed by Amir's willingness to assist Cameron and be on the record to give Cameron's stance added weight. Even though I really do not want this whole product review thing to be about individuals and personalities, I do feel we can be thankful that Amir has such a strong character. When I first came here I was not sure whether Amir and the way he communicated with his direct unapologetic style would be beneficial to the "cause", but I decided to my part because I valued his scientific approach and his patience in explaining things in an accessible manner. I have since started to really respect the man he seems to be and am thankful for him as a figurehead in matters such as these. Hopefully I have not been turned into a cult member, because I really don't have time for kinky rituals in dimly lit cellars.
I wish Cameron all the best in his fight and am relatively optimistic regarding the outcome. Needless to say, I will not be buying dCS products until they change their culture.
Because of my limited knowledge of anglo-saxon legal systems I will not comment on the legality of dCSs claims with any authority, but having had brushes with similarly litigious companies and individuals in the past (mostly American - not a jab, just an observation), I suspect this is meant to scare Cameron and I would not be surprised such methods have worked in the past for dCS. We, as consumers and as freedom loving -insert your nationality here-, need to fight such scare-tactics. This behaviour is unacceptable, what ever you think of the person being attacked.
With "who" is being attacked in mind, I really am impressed by Amir's willingness to assist Cameron and be on the record to give Cameron's stance added weight. Even though I really do not want this whole product review thing to be about individuals and personalities, I do feel we can be thankful that Amir has such a strong character. When I first came here I was not sure whether Amir and the way he communicated with his direct unapologetic style would be beneficial to the "cause", but I decided to my part because I valued his scientific approach and his patience in explaining things in an accessible manner. I have since started to really respect the man he seems to be and am thankful for him as a figurehead in matters such as these. Hopefully I have not been turned into a cult member, because I really don't have time for kinky rituals in dimly lit cellars.
I wish Cameron all the best in his fight and am relatively optimistic regarding the outcome. Needless to say, I will not be buying dCS products until they change their culture.
High-end companies would go out of business if they just relied on "high-end" audiophiles! There is no volume in that. A lot of business comes from wealthy individuals without being a "high-end audiophile." Those people and their advisors are gradually taking note of what we are doing at ASR. A lot of non-high-end customers also exist which were buying such gear as "end game." That opinion is changing. And these people read what is online.
Does everyone remember when MSB used to bag ESS tech for being a comsumer grade DAC owned by a computer company ? Yep I kid you not there was a youtube video made by MSB some years ago before they made it big, and by the old man who no longer runs the company. A lot of people were having ago at him so they took the video down. They must have felt threaten by the growth in consumer grade DAC chips so they had to step up their game by carving out chunks of aluminium from aluminium billet and dividng the DAC into sections to justify their ridiculous price and to distinguish themselves from the mass market and hey it has worked for them
Simultaneously thick-skinned enough to sell a luxury product featuring unsubstantiated claims and thin-skinned enough to be offended by the competition, lol.
Something cake, something eat it too.
Galliardist
Major Contributor
I understand that defamation suits arise in different countries at different times. Australia has poorer protection for reviewers, and US companies have tried suing reviewers from other countries in Australia, though I don't know what the results were. Apparently there was a decision that if the review could be read on a screen in Australia, though, it counted as being published here. Law is tricky.
Galliardist
Major Contributor
So did the comments on the Lina. It could all be dragged in.
See this response from dCS to stereophile no less: https://www.stereophile.com/content/dcs-bartok-da-processorheadphone-amplifier-manufacturers-comment
"Reviews in audio publications have been a useful way for a consumer to gain a better understanding of a product, its designers, and the company that manufactured it. Sadly, we feel that this review has failed to deliver on most of the above and does little to make the reader more informed about the Bartók.
This deficiency is especially illustrated in the listening notes. For instance, a considerable amount of space was spent discussing a failed attempt at a comparison using an analogue source. Later, when attempting to compare the Bartók to a different DAC, the reviewer once again spends many paragraphs discussing the test (one of which is technically flawed) rather than details of his actual impressions of the Bartók—which, in the end, are summarized as wholly positive overall."
This was the conclusion of the subjective review:
"Until then, I'll consider the Bartók the state of the art, while noting that there are other, cheaper products nipping aggressively at its heels."
I suspect what got them unhappy was stating the bolded part which is quite factual.
Above answer was written by:
"David J. Steven, Managing Director
John Quick, General Manager, dCS Americas"
Is John Quick the same one that contacted Cameron? Too lazy to watch the video again.
Regardless, they seem to have total lack of business common sense to do things like this.
"Reviews in audio publications have been a useful way for a consumer to gain a better understanding of a product, its designers, and the company that manufactured it. Sadly, we feel that this review has failed to deliver on most of the above and does little to make the reader more informed about the Bartók.
This deficiency is especially illustrated in the listening notes. For instance, a considerable amount of space was spent discussing a failed attempt at a comparison using an analogue source. Later, when attempting to compare the Bartók to a different DAC, the reviewer once again spends many paragraphs discussing the test (one of which is technically flawed) rather than details of his actual impressions of the Bartók—which, in the end, are summarized as wholly positive overall."
This was the conclusion of the subjective review:
"Until then, I'll consider the Bartók the state of the art, while noting that there are other, cheaper products nipping aggressively at its heels."
I suspect what got them unhappy was stating the bolded part which is quite factual.
Above answer was written by:
"David J. Steven, Managing Director
John Quick, General Manager, dCS Americas"
Is John Quick the same one that contacted Cameron? Too lazy to watch the video again.
Regardless, they seem to have total lack of business common sense to do things like this.
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2016
- Messages
- 23,571
- Likes
- 44,523
The first name is John. The video blurred out the last name. But it says VP of Sales and Marketing. So maybe not the same.
Roland68
Major Contributor
You are absolutely wrong.
For many retailers (I mean real physical retailers with a shop and audiophile products), the mention of ASR causes them to gasp.
Many retailers also now prohibit bringing the cheap and well-tested devices on ASR, especially DACs, for comparison.
And it is precisely the controversial discussions in other forums that are leading to more and more people, companies and manufacturers becoming aware of ASR, and developers of course. The number of hits and views of many posts speak for themselves.
Various discussions this year at the High End in Munich, with reviewers, bloggers, developers and manufacturers, were also clear on this and the influence of ASR is now clear to everyone.
Seems as John Quick left dcs for Dynaudio a couple of years ago.
www.stereophile.com
John Quick Moves to Dynaudio
[With this post, Stereophile to begins posting industry news—items that ultimately will appear in the magazine in the Industry Update section—online when it's still fresh.]
www.stereophile.com
Completely agree with this. Not to mention how ASR regularly shows up at the top of Google searches as well.
It's DCS US, not the UK parent who have done this. I'd imagine the uk parent is back channelling quietly this morning to fix this.
The Ferrum wandla came years later, so that claim of bias can't be levelled at cameron.
Even if one doesn't believe Cameron's subjective views, magic ears and all that stuff, that's a million miles away from saying he's lying. I don't believe he can hear what he says he can, but I believe he believes it. Same as i don't believe anyone who does sighted listening tests.
At every step he's acted like an adult, giving them ways out of this, asking them to provide specifics he can address, and making corrections where he can. Dcs have fallen far short.
Under uk law they've missed the time period, under US law he's covered by free speech. There's no case to answer, they are simply trying to bankrupt him with legal costs. So fuck them, I'll put $100 up to wipe the smile of their stupid faces, and I'm sure thousands of others would too.
I actually like his reviews, there's good tech, product design, user experience and much more in them, I just discount listening impressions not backed with measurements.
Irrespective of whether you like the guy, or subjective reviews, you should all get behind him. Because it's one step away from being able to publish any reviews at all not backed up by a reviewer/ website with a large legal fund to fight such frivolous cases.
The Ferrum wandla came years later, so that claim of bias can't be levelled at cameron.
Even if one doesn't believe Cameron's subjective views, magic ears and all that stuff, that's a million miles away from saying he's lying. I don't believe he can hear what he says he can, but I believe he believes it. Same as i don't believe anyone who does sighted listening tests.
At every step he's acted like an adult, giving them ways out of this, asking them to provide specifics he can address, and making corrections where he can. Dcs have fallen far short.
Under uk law they've missed the time period, under US law he's covered by free speech. There's no case to answer, they are simply trying to bankrupt him with legal costs. So fuck them, I'll put $100 up to wipe the smile of their stupid faces, and I'm sure thousands of others would too.
I actually like his reviews, there's good tech, product design, user experience and much more in them, I just discount listening impressions not backed with measurements.
Irrespective of whether you like the guy, or subjective reviews, you should all get behind him. Because it's one step away from being able to publish any reviews at all not backed up by a reviewer/ website with a large legal fund to fight such frivolous cases.
It's not just ASR, it's all over Head-Fi, Reddit, Audiophile Style, SBAF, Steve Hoffmann, I'm sure plenty of other places. Very few people are being sympathetic to dCS.
Roland68
Major Contributor
But that could backfire.
If the court finds that neither the measured values nor the listening results are better than with a $1000 or $3000 DAC, that would have disastrous consequences for dCS and many high-end companies.
Once it's before the judge, he sets the roadmap. If the judge commissions an expert to measure the devices and check the company's statements in a blinded test, dCS can no longer influence the outcome.
DSJR
Master Contributor
As an aside, I'd suggest that dac tech at low prices, has transformed in the last ten or so years. Twenty odd years back, dCS really was at or near state of the art I recall, but dacs under a grand (well under a grand if simplicity in facilities is key and one doesn't mind a simple casework) have come on so far and so fast, it's a very different game now...
We've improved the lighting.
Even Linus Tech Tip might be covering this. That's big.
I wonder if this negative publicity can bring in sales. Besides, dCS wasn't known to most of the mainstream community, some of whom may be affluent.
It'll be so sad if they end up making more sales from the clout this saga brings.
Galliardist
Major Contributor
IIRC it was z John Giolas who contacted Cameron - he joined dCS in 2020 according to their website. Prior to this he seems to have worked for Wilson Audio for several years. Really, someone who should know better: but maybe he'd never had to cope with a negative review before!"David J. Steven, Managing Director
John Quick, General Manager, dCS Americas"
Is John Quick the same one that contacted Cameron? Too lazy to watch the video again.
Regardless, they seem to have total lack of business common sense to do things like this.
http://ixbtlabs.com/articles/maudioaudiophile/index.html
Well, we already got transparent enough sound cards for $200 (especially relative to transducers) in 2002.
- Status